JUDICIAL ATTITUDES IN THE CUSTOMS-UNION CASE

Mathews, Robert Elden

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 30

First Page: 699

Year: 1932

Bluebook Citation: 30 MICH. L. REV. 699 (1932)

Author: Robert Elden Mathews: all 14 publications


Abstract

The World Court decision of last September in the Austro-German Customs case has given rise in many quarters to an attack upon the Court itself. The criticism has not been based solely upon the eight-to-seven vote of the judges. We have too many one-man majorities in our own judiciary to find much concern there. But the alignment of nationalities from which the two groups of judges come has been the source of the greatest adverse comment.

For it so happens that the majority, holding illegal the proposed Customs Union, was composed of judges many of whose nations were opposed to such a pact, while the minority included men from countries either favoring or indifferent to it. Thus, the critics conclude, the decision must not have been arrived at objectively; it must, on the contrary, have been the product of political prejudice and national loyalties.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.